Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 17a-542 (2025)

(Formerly Sec. 17-206c). Humane and dignified treatment required. Formulation of discharge plan

✓ laws through the 2024 session: the source has not yet published 2025 Public Acts (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Every patient treated in any facility for treatment of persons with psychiatric disabilities shall receive humane and dignified treatment at all times, with full respect for his personal dignity and right to privacy. Each patient shall be treated in accordance with a specialized treatment plan suited to his disorder. Such treatment plan shall include a discharge plan which shall include, but not be limited to, (1) reasonable notice to the patient of his impending discharge, (2) active participation by the patient in planning for his discharge and (3) planning for appropriate aftercare to the patient upon his discharge.

(1971, P.A. 834, S. 3; P.A. 82-329, S. 1, 3; P.A. 93-369, S. 4; P.A. 95-257, S. 48, 58.)

History: P.A. 82-329 clarified that specialized treatment plans include a discharge plan; Sec. 17-206c transferred to Sec. 17a-542 in 1991; P.A. 93-369 changed “the mentally disordered” to “persons with a mental illness”; P.A. 95-257 substituted “psychiatric disabilities” for “mental illness”, effective July 1, 1995.

Annotations to former section 17-206c:

Cited. 210 C. 806. Issue is whether good faith efforts made to improve health. 213 C. 548. Cited. 221 C. 346.

Cited. 13 CA 493; 17 CA 130.

Annotations to present section:

Cited. 233 C. 44.

Placement of female patient in otherwise all-male maximum security unit in forensic psychiatric hospital is not per se inhumane and undignified treatment where treatment plan was specialized, permissible and reasonable in view of relevant information. 188 CA 275.

Cited. 44 CS 53.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1995–2025 · leading case: Wiseman v. Armstrong, 850 A.2d 114 (Conn. 2004).
Wiseman v. Armstrong, 850 A.2d 114 (Conn. 2004). · cites it 11× “” General Statutes § 17a-542. This statute is in direct contradiction to other statutes that govern the movement of individuals in the custody of the department of correction, 17 whether from a hospital for psychiatric disability to a correctional institution, or between *816…”
State v. Garcia, 658 A.2d 947 (Conn. 1995). · cites it 9× “23 There is not, however, any such exclusion of § 54-56d committees from the other provisions of the patients’ bill of rights. Nonetheless, we are convinced that these other provisions would not necessarily be violated by involuntary medication of the defendant.”
Doe v. Dept. of Mental Health & Addiction Servs., 204 A.3d 1230 (Conn. App. Ct. 2019). · cites it 20× “Mary Doe was born in 1970, and she was raised by her great aunt because her parents essentially were absent from her early life. Mary Doe's childhood and adolescence were "chaotic, unpredictable, and dangerous, often requiring intensive mental health treatment and containment.”
Phoebe G. v. Solnit, 743 A.2d 606 (Conn. 1999). · cites it 7× “Most importantly, the plaintiff has a right to be an “active participant” in her treatment plan under General Statutes § 17a-542. Implicit in this right to active participation is a right to have an advocate to help her meaningfully participate in her treatment plan.”
Moscovitch v. Danbury Hosp., 25 F. Supp. 2d 74 (D. Conn. 1998). “section 17a-542 (1995) provides: Every patient treated in any facility for treatment of persons with psychiatric disabilities shall receive humane and dignified treatment at all times, with full respect for his personal dignity and right to privacy.”
Giordano v. Connecticut Valley Hosp., 588 F. Supp. 2d 306 (D. Conn. 2008). “§ 17a-541 (safeguarding psychiatric patients’ personal, property, and civil rights); § 17a-542 (guaranteeing psychiatric patients “humane and dignified treatment at all times, with full respect for [their] personal dignity and right to privacy”); § 17a-543 (requiring patients’…”
Anderson v. Dike, 202 A.3d 448 (Conn. App. Ct. 2019). · cites it 2× “n January, 2015, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, asserting that a claim under General Statutes § 17a-550 for violation of the patients' bill of rights can be brought only against the state and not against individual state…”
Drummer v. State, 341 A.3d 316 (Conn. App. Ct. 2025). · cites it 2× “At each involuntary civil commitment hearing, the treating psychiatrist will testify within a reasonable degree of medical certainty when it is likely that the patient will stabilize and no longer be a danger to self or others or gravely disabled or be able to receive community…”
State v. Anderson, No. SC19399 (Conn. Nov. 3, 2015). · cites it 2× “38 They include not just the protection of a patient’s ‘‘per- sonal, property [and] civil rights’’; General Statutes § 17a-541; rights to communicate by mail and telephone and to receive visitors; General Statutes §§ 17a-546 and 17a-547; and qualified rights to refuse the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.